Report from the Strategic Director of Adult Care, Housing and Public Health.
Recommendations:
That Cabinet:
1.
Note the increase in homelessness and growing demand
for temporary accommodation and the work being undertaken by the
Council to respond to this demand.
2.
Approve the adoption of the new Temporary
Accommodation Placement Policy (Appendix 1).
3.
Delegate authority to the Strategic Director of Adult
Care, Housing and Public Health for a 3-year period in consultation
with the Cabinet Member for Housing, to make operational amendments to the Policy
when the need is identified.
4. Note officers’ intention to continue to pursue opportunities for a 3-year period to increase the portfolio of Council-owned temporary accommodation to meet service demands, subject to available budget and in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing.
Minutes:
The Chair invited Councillor Allen, Cabinet Member for Housing and James Clarke, Assistant Director for Housing to introduce the report. The Cabinet Member for Housing explained the report was seeking approval for the ne Temporary Accommodation Policy. It explained how the Council met it statutory obligations and provided a brief update on the demand for temporary accommodation. It mentioned the work being undertaken to improve the situation for residents and indicated a negative impact on the Council’s financial position, which was welcomed.
Councillor Yasseen expressed that she was supportive of the idea of not using hotels for temporary accommodation due to the expense and didn’t feel they were fit for purpose. She felt that demand had increased because the Council did not build enough houses that fit within the alternative model. She noted that around 600 houses had been built in Boston Castle but understood that very little of that stock could be used for this clientele. There were lots of factors that contributed to that. She asked if the new Housing Strategy plans ensured this need was accounted for.
A new Housing Strategy was being developed and would be presented to scrutiny and Cabinet next year. It was explained that the majority of the need could be met through straightforward general needs accommodation. Generally, rents needed to be low, which was why social housing was the preference. The was one of the reasons why there had been long standing support for an ambitious housing growth programme in the borough. Many of the Council lettings did go to households who were homeless or were previously homeless but there was a shortage of council housing which led to the temporary accommodation issue. All members were encouraged to support housing growth initiatives within their areas.
There was small proportion of the caseload who’s needs could not be met through traditional general needs council housing. An example would be single males with a history of rough sleeping where those things had been tried previously but not worked. Supported accommodation was needed for those households, and this was a challenging sector due to the funding issues. The Council was considering that as part of the Housing Strategy what it needed to do but also where did it need to work in partnership with charities and housing associations who already did this in other areas to ensure the right provision was in the right locations.
The routine use of hotels as temporary accommodation needed to be phased out but unfortunately, there would always be a place for the use of hotels as emergency accommodation when people present on the day, because it was not feasible or pragmatic to find a permanent or even semi-permanent property in all cases.
Councillor Yasseen sought assurance that when the policy was implemented that all safeguarding issues were considered when using hotels and that when new housing was developed that the Council was not concentrating on availability in one area over another. Part B of appendix one was a practice guide for officers on risk assessing and managing the impact of hotel and bed and breakfast placements. The policy was introduced as a response to the Council using a lot more temporary accommodation that previously. The Council did not have to have this policy but felt because it was making a lot of placements in temporary accommodation that it was important to have clear, authorised by Cabinet, guidelines and policies around how placement decisions were taken effectively. As part of that process, the Council had realised it had, on occasions, become overly reliant on some hotels. The guidance in Part B provided some guidance, mechanisms, processes, and trigger points for ensuring that was done as safely as possible.
The Council had a statutory duty to accommodate and there were only so many hotels in Rotherham and many of those were in areas already built up with residential accommodation nearby.
Councillor Marshall felt it was a fully comprehensive temporary accommodation policy but queried why delegated authority had been sought to make operational amendments to the policy for a three-year period. The policy was a very operational policy and had been written to provide full transparency on an important area however it included lots of detail and flexibility was needed within that three-year period to make changes in light of pressures and demands and legislative changes. The principles of the policy would not be changed.
Councillor A Carter sought clarification that his understanding that when the Council used temporary accommodation such a crash pads, that a number of them were available and ward members and members of the community got notified in the consultation and acquisition process. He also expressed concerns that recommendation 3 to delegate authority would remove some of the wider democratic accountability. It was suggested that when operational changes had been made that they be submitted to scrutiny for discussion.
The Chair explained that councillors set policy and were responsible for the budget, that operational issues were for the Strategic Directors, and it was expected that the Strategic Directors would liaise with the Cabinet Members on any major changes.
It was clarified that ward members were not consulted with prior to a decision being taken to aside one of the council properties for use as temporary accommodation. This was because those decisions had to be made quickly along with issues regarding safeguarding and the sharing of information which may not be appropriate. It was acknowledged that the Council had not been transparent enough in the past about where the properties were located and a table had recently been produced, which could be shared with members which set out how many properties were in each ward by bed size. The Assistant Director of Housing made a commitment to share with ward members where those properties were located in terms of how many were in each ward but not the actual addresses.
Upon the vote which included one member voting against and one member abstaining from the vote, the following was resolved:
Resolved: That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board supported the recommendations that Cabinet:
1. Note the increase in homelessness and growing demand for temporary accommodation and the work being undertaken by the Council to respond to this demand.
2. Approve the adoption of the new Temporary Accommodation Placement Policy (Appendix 1).
3. Delegate authority to the Strategic Director of Adult Care, Housing and Public Health for a 3-year period in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing, to make operational amendments to the Policy when the need is identified.
4. Note officers’ intention to continue to pursue opportunities for a 3-year period to increase the portfolio of Council-owned temporary accommodation to meet service demands, subject to available budget and in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing.
Further actions that arose from discussions were that:
· The Assistant Director of Housing would share information with members regarding the number of temporary accommodation properties located in each ward, but not the actual addresses of those properties.
Supporting documents: